Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Piano Teachers Forum Official way to write title of Sonata pieces

For Clementi Sonatina Op. 36......
Which of these is official way of writing the title?

Sonatina in C Major Op.36, No.3: I: Spiritoso
Sonatina in C Major Op.36, No.3, 1st movement (Spiritoso)
Sonatina in C Major Op.36, #3, Spiritoso

Any other suggestions?

When I'm printing programs, I usually go with #1:

Sonatina in C Major Op.36, No.3: I: Spiritoso

+1

I think this is how it is listed in most syllabi and videos as well.

I usually do this (let's see if it lets me do it here):

Sonatina in C, Op. 36, no. 3
Spiritoso

Well, the preview doesn't show the indent (I indent Spiritoso 5 spaces).

For someone who's not a musician, I think that version two is easier to understand.

Sonatina in C, Op. 36, no. 3
Spiritoso


.....

the letter "n" of "no." need capital letter or small letter for official way?

Small

Compare this
Sonatina in C Major, Op.36, no.3: I: Spiritoso

to this

Sonatina in C Major, Op.36, no.3: I - Spiritoso

Which one is better?

Sonatina in C Major, Op.36, no.3: I - Spiritoso

personally.

I am volunteering my time to create a program for local competition and for those playing same pieces, their teachers enter as follow:

Sonatina in C Major, op. 36, #1, 1st movement
Sonatina in C Major, Op. 36, No. 1-1st Move.
Sonatina in C, Op. 36 #1- Allegro

This is Clementi's Op.36. All these three entries is referring to same piece.

I am just amaze about how many different ways of writing the title of the pieces. I think somehow music teachers should unify the format of writing the title of the pieces so that no confusion happen.

So, would the correct writing should be:
Sonatina in C Major, Op.36, no.1: I - Allegro

Is this correct?

EZ, it's nice that you care so much, but you're a little stuck on the idea of "correct" here. There is not one correct or official way of writing what you wish to write. I've written program notes for many arts organizations, and can assure you of this.

You are on the right track, but so were those other teachers. The goals are mainly reader understanding and consistency, I'd say.

I would probably echo Minniemay by suggesting the use of two lines, and write something like this:

Sonatina in C Major, Op. 36, No. 1
[Indent] Allegro (first movement)

I find the use of a colon, a Roman numeral, and a dash in your version all slow my reading and comprehension. OTH, it does you save a line versus my version. So it's up to you. You wouldn't have to add the parenthetical words "first movement" if you don't like them.

My only real suggestion to you is to capitalize the letter "n" of the abbreviated word "Number," since you capitalized the "o" of the abbreviated word "Opus." But conversely you could just as readily use a small "o" for "opus" and a small "n" for "number."

Good luck. This stuff is indeed annoying and fussy, but ultimately you just make some choices and get that program printed. If you can do that without typos, that's already quite an achievement! :-)

Just be consistent. There is not one "correct" way to write sonatina titles. I do programs for my branch every year, and I've decided that piano teachers are very bad at following directions, either that or they don't read directions. So it's up to the program-maker to clean up all the errors. We have teachers who spell "Beethoven" incorrectly! You get a lot of those errors when the majority of the teachers' first language is not English.

You will not please everybody. Some older people are adamant about the way they capitalize titles since they've been using the same capitalization rules for the past 40 years. Just tell them to get lost. Or, better yet, ask them to volunteer making the programs next year!

Or you could learn from them. But the wisdom of age is often lost on the exuberance of youth. It cuts both ways!

My point is that writing conventions change. Grammar--or in this case capitalization, punctuation, and spacing--does change. The prescriptive grammar of yesteryear is no longer taught in schools, and, for better or for worse, it is being replaced by a system of descriptive grammar to reflect how people actually use the language.

AZN, where are the standards being established in the field of music? Is there a central place that oversees such standards? Would these be international in English speaking countries? In my present field I have to adhere to the standards of various professions, and they often do have a central body which actually publish such standards, especially when there are changes. So when you say they have changed, then it would be good for everyone to be up to speed if there is some body overseeing this.

I don't think there is one "standard" in music. As soon as you start using terms like "standard," you get into the field of "correct" vs. "incorrect." I think classical music as an academic subject area is truly blessed by not having an authoritative "standard."

I always do this. It looks cleaner to me.

Sonatina in C Major, Op. 36#3
I. Spiritoso

Or if space is tight:

Spiritoso, from Sonatina in C Major, Op. 36#3

Surely there are scholarly papers in the field of music.
Publications will be formatted in a consistent style whether it be MLA, APA, COS, Chicago Manual of Style or something else.

I would not capitalize M in the word major.

Examples: http://www.pianotexas.org/2011/program_notes.asp

Edit: This is just a personal preference. I think there is more visual appeal when the words "major", "minor", "sharp" and "flat" are not capitalized.

http://kjos.vo.llnwd.net/o28/pdf/GP606_toc.pdf

Please refer to the above Keith Snell link.

I prefer this style that he has in his book:

Sonatina in F, Op.36, No.4
[Indent] III. Allegro vivace

I was a graduate assistant back in graduate school and my job was to create programs for weekly Friday noon student recital and monthly Tuesday night faculty recitals. Each professor in my department should give me the title of the pieces that they or their students will be performing and I just copy and paste into the program that I design.

I have to say that I never have a problem with my professors back in my graduate school and their way of writing the titles. They are following the above format that I paste in the link.

However, I am just amaze to see how "not consistent" each piano teachers are in my town. Out of 50 plus teachers, only 5 teachers are consistent with their entries and follow the above format that I "learned" during graduate school.

Speaking of "standard format" don't you think that we should be consistent in referring the title of the pieces just like MLA, APA other academic journal?

I am seriously think that music educators should talk about this to standardize the format.

I am not talking about to standardize the interpretation of the piece here, I am sure our field is blessed with a lot of freedom. However, I think there should be only one way to write the title of the music.

For example, why you think Kochel categories Mozart's music? I am not sure the answer, but I personally think it is because Mozart has too many pieces with same name and it is hard to distinguish among each other. So, he standardize Mozart's music and every one after him use "K" numbers for Mozart's music.

What is your opinions on this?